Multireader evaluation of radiologist performance for COVID-19 detection on emergency department chest radiographs

Chest radiographs (CXR) are frequently used as a screening tool for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection pending reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, despite recommendations against this. We evaluated radiologist performance for COVID-19 diagnosis on CXR at the tim...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical imaging 2022-02, Vol.82, p.77-82
Hauptverfasser: Gichoya, Judy W., Sinha, Priyanshu, Davis, Melissa, Dunkle, Jeffrey W., Hamlin, Scott A., Herr, Keith D., Hoff, Carrie N., Letter, Haley P., McAdams, Christopher R., Puthoff, Gregory D., Smith, Kevin L., Steenburg, Scott D., Banerjee, Imon, Trivedi, Hari
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 82
container_issue
container_start_page 77
container_title Clinical imaging
container_volume 82
creator Gichoya, Judy W.
Sinha, Priyanshu
Davis, Melissa
Dunkle, Jeffrey W.
Hamlin, Scott A.
Herr, Keith D.
Hoff, Carrie N.
Letter, Haley P.
McAdams, Christopher R.
Puthoff, Gregory D.
Smith, Kevin L.
Steenburg, Scott D.
Banerjee, Imon
Trivedi, Hari
description Chest radiographs (CXR) are frequently used as a screening tool for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection pending reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, despite recommendations against this. We evaluated radiologist performance for COVID-19 diagnosis on CXR at the time of patient presentation in the Emergency Department (ED). We extracted RT-PCR results, clinical history, and CXRs of all patients from a single institution between March and June 2020. 984 RT-PCR positive and 1043 RT-PCR negative radiographs were reviewed by 10 emergency radiologists from 4 academic centers. 100 cases were read by all radiologists and 1927 cases by 2 radiologists. Each radiologist chose the single best label per case: Normal, COVID-19, Other – Infectious, Other – Noninfectious, Non-diagnostic, and Endotracheal Tube. Cases labeled with endotracheal tube (246) or non-diagnostic (54) were excluded. Remaining cases were analyzed for label distribution, clinical history, and inter-reader agreement. 1727 radiographs (732 RT-PCR positive, 995 RT-PCR negative) were included from 1594 patients (51.2% male, 48.8% female, age 59 ± 19 years). For 89 cases read by all readers, there was poor agreement for RT-PCR positive (Fleiss Score 0.36) and negative (Fleiss Score 0.46) exams. Agreement between two readers on 1638 cases was 54.2% (373/688) for RT-PCR positive cases and 71.4% (679/950) for negative cases. Agreement was highest for RT-PCR negative cases labeled as Normal (50.4%, n = 479). Reader performance did not improve with clinical history or time between CXR and RT-PCR result. At the time of presentation to the emergency department, emergency radiologist performance is non-specific for diagnosing COVID-19. •Emergency radiologists have non-specific performance for interpreting COVID-19 on CXR with a high rate of disagreement.•Radiologist performance is not improved by provision of clinical history for COVID-19 diagnosis.•Increased time between COVID-19 RT-PCR test and CXR did not improve performance.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.10.018
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8585957</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S089970712100423X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2617268604</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c446t-3f53100475e153871cccace9cc58ca952781e89c160c6544990421a012a6bb383</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUU1v1DAUtBCILoW_UEXiwiWLnfjzgkBbCpWKegGulvflJetVEgc7Wan_Hm-3rYALJ1vjmfGbN4RcMLpmlMn3-zX0fvSD69YVrVgG15TpZ2TFtKpLzo15TlZUG1MqqtgZeZXSnmah4eolOau5MlrIakXit6WffUTXYCzw4PrFzT6MRWiL6Bof-tD5NBcTxjbEwY2ARb4Um9uf15clM0WDM8JJMRY4YOxwhLsMTy7OA45zATvMBvdmXXTTLr0mL1rXJ3zzcJ6TH1efv2--lje3X643n25K4FzOZd2KmlHKlUAmaq0YADhAAyA0OCMqpRlqA0xSkOKYmPKKOcoqJ7fbWtfn5MPJd1q2AzaQh4mut1PMW4t3Njhv_34Z_c524WC10MIIlQ3ePRjE8GvJKezgE2DfuxHDkmwlKa00l0Zk6tt_qPuwxDHHyyymKqkl5ZklTyyIIaWI7dMwjNpjrXZvH2u1x1qPeK41Cy_-jPIke-wxEz6eCJgXevAYbQKfm8AmdwuzbYL_3x-_ATCHuLk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2617268604</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Multireader evaluation of radiologist performance for COVID-19 detection on emergency department chest radiographs</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Gichoya, Judy W. ; Sinha, Priyanshu ; Davis, Melissa ; Dunkle, Jeffrey W. ; Hamlin, Scott A. ; Herr, Keith D. ; Hoff, Carrie N. ; Letter, Haley P. ; McAdams, Christopher R. ; Puthoff, Gregory D. ; Smith, Kevin L. ; Steenburg, Scott D. ; Banerjee, Imon ; Trivedi, Hari</creator><creatorcontrib>Gichoya, Judy W. ; Sinha, Priyanshu ; Davis, Melissa ; Dunkle, Jeffrey W. ; Hamlin, Scott A. ; Herr, Keith D. ; Hoff, Carrie N. ; Letter, Haley P. ; McAdams, Christopher R. ; Puthoff, Gregory D. ; Smith, Kevin L. ; Steenburg, Scott D. ; Banerjee, Imon ; Trivedi, Hari</creatorcontrib><description>Chest radiographs (CXR) are frequently used as a screening tool for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection pending reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, despite recommendations against this. We evaluated radiologist performance for COVID-19 diagnosis on CXR at the time of patient presentation in the Emergency Department (ED). We extracted RT-PCR results, clinical history, and CXRs of all patients from a single institution between March and June 2020. 984 RT-PCR positive and 1043 RT-PCR negative radiographs were reviewed by 10 emergency radiologists from 4 academic centers. 100 cases were read by all radiologists and 1927 cases by 2 radiologists. Each radiologist chose the single best label per case: Normal, COVID-19, Other – Infectious, Other – Noninfectious, Non-diagnostic, and Endotracheal Tube. Cases labeled with endotracheal tube (246) or non-diagnostic (54) were excluded. Remaining cases were analyzed for label distribution, clinical history, and inter-reader agreement. 1727 radiographs (732 RT-PCR positive, 995 RT-PCR negative) were included from 1594 patients (51.2% male, 48.8% female, age 59 ± 19 years). For 89 cases read by all readers, there was poor agreement for RT-PCR positive (Fleiss Score 0.36) and negative (Fleiss Score 0.46) exams. Agreement between two readers on 1638 cases was 54.2% (373/688) for RT-PCR positive cases and 71.4% (679/950) for negative cases. Agreement was highest for RT-PCR negative cases labeled as Normal (50.4%, n = 479). Reader performance did not improve with clinical history or time between CXR and RT-PCR result. At the time of presentation to the emergency department, emergency radiologist performance is non-specific for diagnosing COVID-19. •Emergency radiologists have non-specific performance for interpreting COVID-19 on CXR with a high rate of disagreement.•Radiologist performance is not improved by provision of clinical history for COVID-19 diagnosis.•Increased time between COVID-19 RT-PCR test and CXR did not improve performance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0899-7071</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-4499</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.10.018</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34798562</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; African Americans ; Aged ; Agreements ; Cardiothoracic Imaging ; Chest ; Chest X-ray ; Coronavirus ; Coronaviruses ; COVID-19 ; COVID-19 Testing ; CXR ; Disease transmission ; Emergencies ; Emergency medical care ; Emergency medical services ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pandemics ; Patients ; Performance evaluation ; Polymerase chain reaction ; Radiographs ; Radiography ; Radiography, Thoracic ; Radiologists ; Retrospective Studies ; RNA-directed DNA polymerase ; SARS-CoV-2 ; Statistical analysis</subject><ispartof>Clinical imaging, 2022-02, Vol.82, p.77-82</ispartof><rights>2021</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Feb 2022</rights><rights>2021 Published by Elsevier Inc. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c446t-3f53100475e153871cccace9cc58ca952781e89c160c6544990421a012a6bb383</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.10.018$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3536,27903,27904,45974</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34798562$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gichoya, Judy W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinha, Priyanshu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Melissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dunkle, Jeffrey W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamlin, Scott A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herr, Keith D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoff, Carrie N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Letter, Haley P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAdams, Christopher R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Puthoff, Gregory D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Kevin L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steenburg, Scott D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banerjee, Imon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trivedi, Hari</creatorcontrib><title>Multireader evaluation of radiologist performance for COVID-19 detection on emergency department chest radiographs</title><title>Clinical imaging</title><addtitle>Clin Imaging</addtitle><description>Chest radiographs (CXR) are frequently used as a screening tool for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection pending reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, despite recommendations against this. We evaluated radiologist performance for COVID-19 diagnosis on CXR at the time of patient presentation in the Emergency Department (ED). We extracted RT-PCR results, clinical history, and CXRs of all patients from a single institution between March and June 2020. 984 RT-PCR positive and 1043 RT-PCR negative radiographs were reviewed by 10 emergency radiologists from 4 academic centers. 100 cases were read by all radiologists and 1927 cases by 2 radiologists. Each radiologist chose the single best label per case: Normal, COVID-19, Other – Infectious, Other – Noninfectious, Non-diagnostic, and Endotracheal Tube. Cases labeled with endotracheal tube (246) or non-diagnostic (54) were excluded. Remaining cases were analyzed for label distribution, clinical history, and inter-reader agreement. 1727 radiographs (732 RT-PCR positive, 995 RT-PCR negative) were included from 1594 patients (51.2% male, 48.8% female, age 59 ± 19 years). For 89 cases read by all readers, there was poor agreement for RT-PCR positive (Fleiss Score 0.36) and negative (Fleiss Score 0.46) exams. Agreement between two readers on 1638 cases was 54.2% (373/688) for RT-PCR positive cases and 71.4% (679/950) for negative cases. Agreement was highest for RT-PCR negative cases labeled as Normal (50.4%, n = 479). Reader performance did not improve with clinical history or time between CXR and RT-PCR result. At the time of presentation to the emergency department, emergency radiologist performance is non-specific for diagnosing COVID-19. •Emergency radiologists have non-specific performance for interpreting COVID-19 on CXR with a high rate of disagreement.•Radiologist performance is not improved by provision of clinical history for COVID-19 diagnosis.•Increased time between COVID-19 RT-PCR test and CXR did not improve performance.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>African Americans</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Agreements</subject><subject>Cardiothoracic Imaging</subject><subject>Chest</subject><subject>Chest X-ray</subject><subject>Coronavirus</subject><subject>Coronaviruses</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>COVID-19 Testing</subject><subject>CXR</subject><subject>Disease transmission</subject><subject>Emergencies</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Emergency medical services</subject><subject>Emergency Service, Hospital</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pandemics</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Polymerase chain reaction</subject><subject>Radiographs</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Radiography, Thoracic</subject><subject>Radiologists</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>RNA-directed DNA polymerase</subject><subject>SARS-CoV-2</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><issn>0899-7071</issn><issn>1873-4499</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUU1v1DAUtBCILoW_UEXiwiWLnfjzgkBbCpWKegGulvflJetVEgc7Wan_Hm-3rYALJ1vjmfGbN4RcMLpmlMn3-zX0fvSD69YVrVgG15TpZ2TFtKpLzo15TlZUG1MqqtgZeZXSnmah4eolOau5MlrIakXit6WffUTXYCzw4PrFzT6MRWiL6Bof-tD5NBcTxjbEwY2ARb4Um9uf15clM0WDM8JJMRY4YOxwhLsMTy7OA45zATvMBvdmXXTTLr0mL1rXJ3zzcJ6TH1efv2--lje3X643n25K4FzOZd2KmlHKlUAmaq0YADhAAyA0OCMqpRlqA0xSkOKYmPKKOcoqJ7fbWtfn5MPJd1q2AzaQh4mut1PMW4t3Njhv_34Z_c524WC10MIIlQ3ePRjE8GvJKezgE2DfuxHDkmwlKa00l0Zk6tt_qPuwxDHHyyymKqkl5ZklTyyIIaWI7dMwjNpjrXZvH2u1x1qPeK41Cy_-jPIke-wxEz6eCJgXevAYbQKfm8AmdwuzbYL_3x-_ATCHuLk</recordid><startdate>20220201</startdate><enddate>20220201</enddate><creator>Gichoya, Judy W.</creator><creator>Sinha, Priyanshu</creator><creator>Davis, Melissa</creator><creator>Dunkle, Jeffrey W.</creator><creator>Hamlin, Scott A.</creator><creator>Herr, Keith D.</creator><creator>Hoff, Carrie N.</creator><creator>Letter, Haley P.</creator><creator>McAdams, Christopher R.</creator><creator>Puthoff, Gregory D.</creator><creator>Smith, Kevin L.</creator><creator>Steenburg, Scott D.</creator><creator>Banerjee, Imon</creator><creator>Trivedi, Hari</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><general>Published by Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220201</creationdate><title>Multireader evaluation of radiologist performance for COVID-19 detection on emergency department chest radiographs</title><author>Gichoya, Judy W. ; Sinha, Priyanshu ; Davis, Melissa ; Dunkle, Jeffrey W. ; Hamlin, Scott A. ; Herr, Keith D. ; Hoff, Carrie N. ; Letter, Haley P. ; McAdams, Christopher R. ; Puthoff, Gregory D. ; Smith, Kevin L. ; Steenburg, Scott D. ; Banerjee, Imon ; Trivedi, Hari</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c446t-3f53100475e153871cccace9cc58ca952781e89c160c6544990421a012a6bb383</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>African Americans</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Agreements</topic><topic>Cardiothoracic Imaging</topic><topic>Chest</topic><topic>Chest X-ray</topic><topic>Coronavirus</topic><topic>Coronaviruses</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>COVID-19 Testing</topic><topic>CXR</topic><topic>Disease transmission</topic><topic>Emergencies</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Emergency medical services</topic><topic>Emergency Service, Hospital</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pandemics</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Polymerase chain reaction</topic><topic>Radiographs</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Radiography, Thoracic</topic><topic>Radiologists</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>RNA-directed DNA polymerase</topic><topic>SARS-CoV-2</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gichoya, Judy W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinha, Priyanshu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Melissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dunkle, Jeffrey W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamlin, Scott A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herr, Keith D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoff, Carrie N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Letter, Haley P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAdams, Christopher R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Puthoff, Gregory D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Kevin L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steenburg, Scott D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banerjee, Imon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trivedi, Hari</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Clinical imaging</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gichoya, Judy W.</au><au>Sinha, Priyanshu</au><au>Davis, Melissa</au><au>Dunkle, Jeffrey W.</au><au>Hamlin, Scott A.</au><au>Herr, Keith D.</au><au>Hoff, Carrie N.</au><au>Letter, Haley P.</au><au>McAdams, Christopher R.</au><au>Puthoff, Gregory D.</au><au>Smith, Kevin L.</au><au>Steenburg, Scott D.</au><au>Banerjee, Imon</au><au>Trivedi, Hari</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Multireader evaluation of radiologist performance for COVID-19 detection on emergency department chest radiographs</atitle><jtitle>Clinical imaging</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Imaging</addtitle><date>2022-02-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>82</volume><spage>77</spage><epage>82</epage><pages>77-82</pages><issn>0899-7071</issn><eissn>1873-4499</eissn><abstract>Chest radiographs (CXR) are frequently used as a screening tool for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection pending reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, despite recommendations against this. We evaluated radiologist performance for COVID-19 diagnosis on CXR at the time of patient presentation in the Emergency Department (ED). We extracted RT-PCR results, clinical history, and CXRs of all patients from a single institution between March and June 2020. 984 RT-PCR positive and 1043 RT-PCR negative radiographs were reviewed by 10 emergency radiologists from 4 academic centers. 100 cases were read by all radiologists and 1927 cases by 2 radiologists. Each radiologist chose the single best label per case: Normal, COVID-19, Other – Infectious, Other – Noninfectious, Non-diagnostic, and Endotracheal Tube. Cases labeled with endotracheal tube (246) or non-diagnostic (54) were excluded. Remaining cases were analyzed for label distribution, clinical history, and inter-reader agreement. 1727 radiographs (732 RT-PCR positive, 995 RT-PCR negative) were included from 1594 patients (51.2% male, 48.8% female, age 59 ± 19 years). For 89 cases read by all readers, there was poor agreement for RT-PCR positive (Fleiss Score 0.36) and negative (Fleiss Score 0.46) exams. Agreement between two readers on 1638 cases was 54.2% (373/688) for RT-PCR positive cases and 71.4% (679/950) for negative cases. Agreement was highest for RT-PCR negative cases labeled as Normal (50.4%, n = 479). Reader performance did not improve with clinical history or time between CXR and RT-PCR result. At the time of presentation to the emergency department, emergency radiologist performance is non-specific for diagnosing COVID-19. •Emergency radiologists have non-specific performance for interpreting COVID-19 on CXR with a high rate of disagreement.•Radiologist performance is not improved by provision of clinical history for COVID-19 diagnosis.•Increased time between COVID-19 RT-PCR test and CXR did not improve performance.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>34798562</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.10.018</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0899-7071
ispartof Clinical imaging, 2022-02, Vol.82, p.77-82
issn 0899-7071
1873-4499
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8585957
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adult
African Americans
Aged
Agreements
Cardiothoracic Imaging
Chest
Chest X-ray
Coronavirus
Coronaviruses
COVID-19
COVID-19 Testing
CXR
Disease transmission
Emergencies
Emergency medical care
Emergency medical services
Emergency Service, Hospital
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Pandemics
Patients
Performance evaluation
Polymerase chain reaction
Radiographs
Radiography
Radiography, Thoracic
Radiologists
Retrospective Studies
RNA-directed DNA polymerase
SARS-CoV-2
Statistical analysis
title Multireader evaluation of radiologist performance for COVID-19 detection on emergency department chest radiographs
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T12%3A07%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Multireader%20evaluation%20of%20radiologist%20performance%20for%20COVID-19%20detection%20on%20emergency%20department%20chest%20radiographs&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20imaging&rft.au=Gichoya,%20Judy%20W.&rft.date=2022-02-01&rft.volume=82&rft.spage=77&rft.epage=82&rft.pages=77-82&rft.issn=0899-7071&rft.eissn=1873-4499&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.10.018&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2617268604%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2617268604&rft_id=info:pmid/34798562&rft_els_id=S089970712100423X&rfr_iscdi=true